Slashdot Mirror


Yahoo! Settles Patent Dispute

theodp writes "NCR has settled the lawsuit it brought against Yahoo! last December for infringing on 10 patents related to e-commerce technology. The case, discussed earlier on Slashdot, was especially significant because it involved broad patents covering basic Internet functions. As part of the settlement, Yahoo! is now licensing the technology. Terms of the settlement and licensing agreement were not disclosed."

43 of 164 comments (clear)

  1. Urgh. by BJH · · Score: 5, Interesting

    From the law.com article:

    The patents at issue in the Yahoo case cover "ordering and downloading resources from computerized repositories;" a "computer system for management of resources;" and a "mechanism for dependably managing Web synchronization and tracking operations among multiple browsers," among other claims.

    Great. Just great. So now ordering stuff over the Internet is patented. Fine for Yahoo, Amazon or other large companies who can afford to license this crap, but what about smaller businesses?

    Just one more step towards making the Internet a worldwide version of the Shopping Channel. Thanks, NCR. I'll remember you in my prayers tonight.

    1. Re:Urgh. by Tokerat · · Score: 5, Funny

      mechanism for dependably managing Web synchronization and tracking operations among multiple browsers,
      That last one looks an awful lot like "logins and passwords". IANAL.

      I should patent "Method for creating a repository of methods to create goods and services reserved for use by their original designers for a predetermined period ". Then I'd sue the USPTO. Imagine the irony.
      --
      CAn'T CompreHend SARcaSm?
    2. Re:Urgh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      15 Years ago my 5 line bbs had software that allowed folks to order software and subscriptions to the BBS and allowed use of a credit card and or checks to pay for the transaction. I could also sell other things such as faster modems ( I did ) so the 1200 baud folks could upgrade to a more modern 9600 baud ( ok so that is slow now it screamed back then ) modem and such. So it sounds like maybe the folks who wrote the software for TBBS's subscription management system might have prior claim to parts of NCR's patents. And I imagine other BBS software also had similar sotware. I know of at least one that allowed you to run a online store so maybe these folks sould dust off the old stuff and make some money the old fashioned way also by suing NCR ??

    3. Re:Urgh. by gilroy · · Score: 2, Funny
      Blockquoth the poster:

      I think the USPTO wouldn't have a whole lot of trouble proving prior art.

      Oh, I don't know. They seem to have a pretty hard time in other cases...
  2. Re:Bla bla bla... by thesadjester · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. We won't have had enough until this nonsense ends. Having control over a certain implementation is one thing, but to claim IP over "ordering and downloading resources from computerized repositories" is total crap. Basically ordering and downloading were around as were computerized repositories. They just put to things that existed together in one patent to try and control it.

    I wish yahoo had some guts and had decided to take it on. The patent system was never meant to uphold these patents. That's the point, and that's why we keep seeing these stories. If no one knows about it, nothing will happen.

    I feel that action has to be taken, and that individuals as well as corporations this affects voice their opinion to congress and make them add some type of safeguard since the patent office is grossly handing out dangerous patents.

    These are extremely dangerous patents. What if someone took a stove and added a keyboard to it and patented that. The two existed before. Does that mean that one should be able to patent the simple combination of the two?

    --
    -gabe
  3. Boo! by Angry+Pixie · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "ordering and downloading resources from computerized repositories;" a "computer system for management of resources;" and a "mechanism for dependably managing Web synchronization and tracking operations among multiple browsers,"

    So technically everyone who runs a dynamic database-driven website that serves up content is violating at least three of the ten patents NCR holds.

    Yet another reason to hate ATM machines...

    1. Re:Boo! by mericet · · Score: 3, Informative
      Not necessarily, these seem like the patents titles (e.g. 'a method and system for ordering and downloading resources from computerized repositories') and not the claims.

      Titles are usually overly borad, but have no legal imlications, in a patent, only the valid claims have legal imlications and they are usually much narrower.

      P.S. IANAL...

  4. not disclosed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Terms of the settlement and licensing agreement were not disclosed."

    They always say that, eh!?

    I'd like to see a law passed where any time anyone settles out of court, the terms have to be disclosed.

    Just because...

    1. Re:not disclosed by glwtta · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Well anyone, any time might be overdoing it a bit, but when it comes to corporations settling over matters that affect an entire industry, it might be a very good idea.

      Though I doubt that's legally possible, even if corporate regulation was popular around here.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    2. Re:not disclosed by rf0 · · Score: 4, Funny

      They don't want to show how much of their soul they have sold

      Rus

    3. Re:not disclosed by ratamacue · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Great, let's propose MORE government to solve a problem that was created by government in the first place.

      The solution is to abolish the laws which are exploitable and invite people to adopt force as a business model. The problem in this case lies in the exploitable nature of existing US patent law, not because of a lack of some law.

    4. Re:not disclosed by smueller · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The terms are zero money and an indefinite license for the ridiculous patents. NCR knows they would lose a court case. So by settling this way, they assure Yahoo they won't even try to take them to court.. and they put fear into every other company on the internet. Now they can say, "Yahoo already realized it was pointless to fight us and they settled."

    5. Re:not disclosed by ratamacue · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're right, I should have paid more attention to semantics. Just to be clear, it is the notion of using force to accomplish a goal that I consider the root of the problem. I am of the belief that it is never moral or just to use force to achieve a goal, except for the special case of self-defense. Big government encourages the use of force by setting the bad example -- after all, everything government does is rooted in force, by definition.

  5. Exclude it then ... by zonix · · Score: 3, Informative
    Haven't we had enough yet?

    No. But if you like, you can always exclude the patent articles from the homepage in you /. preferences.

    z
    --
    What would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
  6. I refer you to my post dt. July 02 by unixwin · · Score: 5, Interesting


    The link
    or just the quote below...

    Differently seen companies chasing their tails in copyright infringments,
    trade protocol violations and intellectual property rights
    are generally the ones which are going to fall pretty soon.

    Short on cash and not being able to earn/fund the millions
    they were used to in the dotgone era they are metamorphosing into scavengers and opportunists ....
    SCO is a shining example

    The crummy economy is bringing out the best in a lot of Companys, their legal team thinks, "we are getting irrelevant (as a team) , lets think up something to make some money and make sure we dont' get laid off," "hmmm... patent # 5551212 seems to be worth looking into" and there starts their Road to Hell

    Easy money (or so they think) ,lot of publicity (for sure) and a lot of hits on their website , so there's a new concept for you

    the legal team is now the marketing team
    --
    -- everyones not everybody and neither is everybody like everyone.
  7. Patents are evil for software by Elektroschock · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Just a few quotes:

    Indeed, for those of you who were here this morning and listened to the people in the software industry talk about how threatening this is to their businesses, as I see it, patents today are often entrenching the established at the expense of allowing the newcomer to come in. I question today whether a Steve Jobs could start an Apple or a Bill Gates could start a Microsoft in view of the web and thicket of patents that is out there.
    Joshua Kaplan, Intouch

    Oracle Corporation opposes the patentability of software. The Company believes that existing copyright law and available trade secret protections, as opposed to patent law, are better suited to protecting computer software developments.
    Oracle 1994

    The mind has always been sacrosanct. The claim that intellectual processes and logical procedures (that do not primarily manipulate devices) can be possessed and monopolized extends greed and avarice much too far. Algorithmic intellectual processes must remain unpatentable -- even when represented by binary coding in a computer; even when executed by the successor to the calculator.[..]The company for which I am speaking, Autodesk, holds some number of software patents and has applied for others -- which, of course, remain secret under current U.S. law. However, all are defensive -- an infuriating waste of our technical talent and financial resources, made necessary only by the lawyer's invention of software patents. Autodesk has faced at least 17 baseless patent claims made against it and has spent over a million dollars defending itself, with millions more certain to pour down the bottomless patent pit unless we halt this debacle. Fortunately -- unlike smaller software producers -- we have the financial and technical resources to rebuff such claims.

    Jim Warren (Autodesk) 1994

    The time and money we spend on patent filings, prosecution, and maintenance, litigation and licensing could be better spent on product development and research leading to more innovation. But we are filing hundreds of patents each year for reasons unrelated to promoting or protecting innovation.
    Robert Barr (CISCO) 2002

    Please help the Europeans to avoid Arlene McCarthys patent directive legislation. You shall sign the Eurolinux-Petition http://noepatents.org and support FFII http://swpat.ffii.org or other groups http://softwarepatents.co.uk

    Talk to your EU representatives and tell them what you think about software patents, what they mean for your business. Stop the sausage machine as MEP Rothley (pro-swPat] denounced parliament legislation.

    More information about swpat-legislation in the EU.

    1. Re:Patents are evil for software by JamesP · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think the best way to counter stupid laws is by abusing them. Let's start patenting everything that "may"be usd in the future, products that don't exist today because of technicalities, etc... Like: Method to use multiple keys to extend keyboard capabilities (Shift+a = A) Method for finding substrings in a great quantity of text (grep)

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  8. Re:no, of course I didn't, don't ask by digitalunity · · Score: 5, Interesting

    They are licensing the technology from NCR. I guess this way ended up cheaper than the lawsuit. That's sad too. The board of directors looked at the two options and chose the cheaper option, not the right one.

    In this case, doing the Right Thing(TM) cost more than doing the cheap and easy thing. It's sad because they can afford to license this technology from NCR, yet many small companies are left in the dust. And, the fact that they are now licensing these frivolous patents only gives the patents credibility, making it even harder for the little guy to escape.

    I realize, corporations are financially self-serving; but that doesn't make it right.

    --
    You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
  9. Fight Software Patents by lee-irving · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is the reason why we need to fight software patents within the UK and EU. Please email, write, telephone your local MP , MEP and let them know that software patents will kill our industry.


    I am not sure but if the EU starts to accept software patents will the US patents be enforceable through WIPO or similar. If so then the EU will already be at a loss as all the US patents will come into force and by typing this I am probably breaking a few of them :)

    1. Re:Fight Software Patents by Elektroschock · · Score: 2, Informative

      Eu-Parlamentarians Search engine.
      /*I am not sure but if the EU starts to accept software patents will the US patents be enforceable through WIPO or similar. If so then the EU will already be at a loss as all the US patents will come into force and by typing this I am probably breaking a few of them :)*/

      This will be the next step. See FFII swpat AG for comprehensive details or join a Mailinglist patents@Aful.org or bxl@ffii.org

    2. Re:Fight Software Patents by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      A huge problem is that there are already around 40.000 illegal patents registrered in the EU, which will suddenly become legal patents the day software patents become legal.
      75% of those patents are owned by companies outside the EU. Now, this is what I call protecting your national software industry.... Or not!

  10. Stop Complaining by patch-rustem · · Score: 5, Funny

    Stop complaining and join the fun. There's loads of patents to be found at reasonable prices
    Buy a few and start sending out those threating letter yourself. Easy money.
    The SCO way, is the only way.

    --
    Karma: Bad due to google bombing - Robert Watkins woz 'ere.
  11. another retarded patent suit.... by edrugtrader · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "computer system for management of resources;"

    what would ANY computer system be if it DIDN'T "manage resources"?!

    --
    MARIJUANA, SHROOMS, X: ONLINE?! - E
    1. Re:another retarded patent suit.... by Temporal · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Not that I support NCR or anything, but in fairness, "computer system for management of resources" is just a title, not the complete invention. At least, my understanding is that the actual invention is far more specific, including specific methods for managing resources or whatever. The patent doesn't cover all computer systems which manage resources, just ones that do it in a certain way which they claim to have invented. This is why patent names always sound absurd -- people for some reason think that the name is the invention, when it's really just an abstract phrase that says something about what the invention does.

      Again, I do NOT support NCR, nor do I believe that their patents are valid, so please don't flame me. I'm just trying to clarify.

  12. Re:Bla bla bla... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    These are extremely dangerous patents. What if someone took a stove and added a keyboard to it and patented that. The two existed before. Does that mean that one should be able to patent the simple combination of the two?

    The simple combination of the two, no. But if someone came up with some neat way to combine said stove and said keyboard to do something unique/interesting/useful (aside from 'just sit there' and 'make friends question sanity'), then that is something that could be patentable. The problem lies in the determination of whether or not the 'invention' is unique/interesting/useful enough to deserve a patent, which is the responsibility of the patent office. Unfortunately, these folks aren't exactly the smartest people -- not that they're particulary dense, but they just don't usually realize or understand the full implications of approving the patents that are submitted nearly as well as the companies that submit them.

  13. I just don't get it... by little1973 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As far as I know when somebody sues you and he/she lost against you then he/she also has to pay (to a certain ammount decided by the court) for your lawyer in many countries. In such a case as this you may not have to pay in advance to your lawyer, because the lawyer knows you can't lose this ridiculous case and he can get his money from the plaintiff.

    Why does it not work this way in the USA?

    --
    Government cannot make man richer, but it can make him poorer. - Ludwig von Mises
    1. Re:I just don't get it... by glwtta · · Score: 3, Insightful
      In such a case as this you may not have to pay in advance to your lawyer, because the lawyer knows you can't lose this ridiculous case and he can get his money from the plaintiff.

      There are a lot of ifs and mays in that reasoning. As far as I know it is fairly unusual for the judge to order the defendant attorney fees to be paid by the losing party, especially when the dispute is between companies. Furthermore, it is not at all obvious that they would win this, more ridiculous suits have been won (probably even by Yahoo itself). Win or lose, court battles are still orders of magnitude more expensive then settling; especially in these cases where the suing company wants a settlement to establish precedent, and make sure that the settlement terms aren't too burdening. In such a scenario the only reason left to fight would be on principle, and you'll find that American companies (as in most of the world) aren't that great in that arena.

      --
      sic transit gloria mundi
    2. Re:I just don't get it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      In general, there is the "American Rule" and the "English Rule" when it comes to attorney fees. Under the "American Rule", each side pays their own cost of litigation. Under the "English Rule" the prevailing party is entitled to reimbursement of all reasonable costs and expenses, including attorney fees. When it comes to frivolous lawsuits, the "English Rule" is a major deterrent, whereas the "American Rule" is a matter of wallet. This distinction no doubt accounts for the plethora of lawsuits in the U.S.

    3. Re:I just don't get it... by dukerobillard · · Score: 2, Insightful
      The negative outcome of that kind of rule is that individuals will never dare to sue big companies, because losing would bankrupt them.

      Sometimes, a lawsuit is a good thing, and this might prevent good lawsuits.

  14. they were at the start of the 20th C by DrSkwid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When Thomas Watson worked there they used all sorts of bully tactics to squash the competition.

    Then the directors were to be thrown in jail but went on a big PR drive and raised money for US flood victims and avoided the slammer.

    you can read about that here :
    http://www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_J._Watson

    He joined Computing-Tabulating-Recording Co which he changed to IBM. Watson foresaw the empire building of the Nazis and made a nice business model by having European census data collected by IBM ready for when the Nazi occupation arrived and leasing them Hollerith machines to process it. You didn't think they regimented the lives and deaths millions of people with pencil and paper now did you?

    You can't read about that here :
    http://www.watson.ibm.com/t_j_watson_history.ht ml

    But you could try here :
    http://www.edwinblack.com

    These things seem so far away but we are still dealing with the consequences of these actions. I'm sure you all know someone who was in the fighting.
    Millions of people were killed, many by virtue of having hole 12 punched in their card.

    Census data had been given to previous government who mainly saw value in being able to manage their economy with real numbers. The new landlords used the data for whatever they liked and they liked killing people.

    That's why I don't want my biometric data kept somewhere

    It might sound daft but imagine in 100 years time when you are on the train to the deathcamp because "your grandfather clearly states his religion as "Jedi" in the 2001 census".

    Because 1/4 Juden was all it took.

    If that's not related to YRO I don't know what is.

    --
    There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
  15. RIP by CuppaJoe · · Score: 4, Funny

    Uh, wait a minute. So basically, NCR just successfully patented the internet? Wasn't Al Gore smart enough to do that when he invented the thing to begin with?

  16. ... ad absurdum by the+bluebrain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I always wonder whether it wouldn't be possible to demonstrate the absurdity of the system in a "real-world" way.

    The point it that things are being patented that contain no innovation and require no research to develop. Sometimes they're not even developed at all, but still patented - just wild ideas.

    Now it you look at the free software environment, there's tons of development going on all the time, including some substantial innovation - but hardly any of it registers on the economic "IP screen". The best one can hope for is that it can be used as prior art to shoot down some particularly silly patent.

    To shortcut the argument: imagine the FSF or some such organisation going up to MS, SCO et al and being able to go "uh, no, dude, that's covered by such-and-such basic-tech-stupid-patent which belongs to - er, that would be us. Cash will be fine please. Repeatedly." - basically until it becomes clear to every last one of them that the economic environment just isn't going to work like this.

    It all breaks down at the point that it sucks to formulate the patents, shove them through the [$laywer]-filter, have them registered etc. etc., and defend them. Plus, it costs a bit. And no, I'm not offering myself as a volunteer.

    Ah, well.

    --
    yes, we have no bananas
  17. Companies Behaving Badly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What sort of moral foundations are behind so many of these companies today? Can they even be considered moral entities? I'm at a loss as to how to quantify the behavior I've seen the past few years with all the patenting, compromising government with bribes, outsourcing, and overall sleaze.

    Animals at best. Monsters even.

    If a city had wild and dangerous animals wandering the streets, they would waste no time addressing the problem. Why is it that these powerful creatures allowed to perform intellectual, legal, monetary, and diplomatic harm to the US without any action being taken?

    They're becoming mad dogs, doing harm to all they touch while crying out the whole time "We must remain profitable."

    Well, that raises an interesting question:

    If a corporation pays little or no taxes and refuses to employ Americans, does it really matter to the United States if they remain profitable or not?

    Time to have a good look at some of these mad dogs and seeing just how much they deserve government contracts, tax exemptions, and other little perks.

    If they want to dump Americans and not contribute to the economy, lets dump them. What harm could it do to get rid of a few leeches? A little bit of political pressure, get rid of a handful, that's all that would be needed. the rest would fall into line. Just like how the IRS targets high profile tax evaders and the RIAA targets the rich kids.

    I know IBM is kind of popular around here. I kind of liked them myself until recently. But 3 million outsourced jobs? FUCK YOU IBM. You evict that many people form their jobs and that's kinda mass murder. The pain of 3 million people out of work. If all of them cried out at the same time you could probably hear them clearly from coast to coast, no matter where you were at.

    There's an undertone of barbarism to all this. Brutal and cold hearted people who could give a fuck what happens to the rest of America so long as they get their golden parachute and stock options.

    Corporations are given a lot of responsibility and power in this country. And in the course of the past 5 years alone, we've seen scandals that stretch the imagination from just about every sector. A bunch of evil children running amok with the keys to the nation.

    1. Re:Companies Behaving Badly by Eric+Ass+Raymond · · Score: 4, Insightful
      But 3 million outsourced jobs? FUCK YOU IBM. You evict that many people form their jobs and that's kinda mass murder.

      Bollocks. And where does it say that you have the right to a job - in particular to the same job you've held previously? The primary function of a corporation is to thrive financially and generate wealth for the society. If outsourcing is a realistic alternative, then that's what should be done. If it does not, there'll be soon no jobs for anyone. Better 3 million outsourced jobs so that at least some may stay.

      There is no obligation for anyone to start a business. It's voluntary. Jobs are created as a positive side effect but corporations are under no obligation to provide SECURE jobs.

      I am 32 and my job is on the line every 6 months and I'm not complaining. If my employer can't afford to pay me, there is no point in complaining. I don't have any expectations that I'll be working here in 24 months - but then again I rather like it that way.

      Planning for the inevitable period of unemployment, stashing away money for a bad day and learning new skills outside the scope of my daily job keeps me sharp. I like being sharp, versatile and not getting too comfortable with my life.

      I shudder when I think of people who think they have their life worked out at 25. They've got a degree, a secure job, a wife/husband, an idyllic house in suburbia, a car and 2.5 kids who are nice, clean and obedient and love you very, very much. All the goals they set themselves when they were 16. Nothing to look forward to? No unpredictability? No change. No growth. No improvement. Just living without being alive.

    2. Re:Companies Behaving Badly by Alioth · · Score: 2, Informative

      > But 3 million outsourced jobs? FUCK YOU IBM.

      IBM doesn't even employ 3M people - you're not even in the same order of magnitude. If they outsource 3M jobs, they are *employing* an extra 2.75M people. Sounds like it'd be good for the world as a whole.

  18. Working as an engineer? by Rogerborg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Start taking law courses at night school. Now.

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
  19. An idea.. by MoOsEb0y · · Score: 2, Funny

    Someone should patent a "systematic way of scanning peer to peer networks for the purpose of obtaining evidence for use in copyright litigation". Then we'd just sue the RIAA/MPAA whenever they use our patented method :)

  20. time for change by Bruha · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Software patents are bad ideas all around. It will not be long before some idiot is awarded a patent for A + B = C it seems. Maybe it's time for a SEC investigation into the patent office to check for bribery and other criminal actions.

    It would be better for companies to defend their products as innovative, not the functions within them that make things work. Disney has done very well with copyright laws instead of resorting to patenting the process of stuffing winnie the poo dolls.

  21. Bread and Circuses by heironymouscoward · · Score: 4, Interesting

    This story has a nasty, nasty feel about it.
    NCR is the company where Thomas J. Watson Sr. learned the dirty tricks he needed to found and run IBM. By 1920, NCR had already perfected the techniques of capturing customers and smashing competitors (often literally, with sticks and stones). IBM did the same in a slightly genteeler way, Microsoft did the same a generation later.

    So NCR is back and has cornered one of the few Internet success stories. Next, Google and Amazon? The patents appear to be so basic that they apply to every commercial web site, nay, every commercial software application.

    Evil, dangerous, and cynically positioned to take advantage of other people's hard work and sacrifice.

    Why does this kind of parasitical behaviour go unpunished? Because the ones doing it are part of the system, not outside it. Not only does the system allow this kind of abuse, it has pretty much evolved to support and protect it.

    Conclusion: the modern political body is corrupt and survives by manipulating public opinion. Nothing new... two millenia after the fall of the Roman Empire, we are treated in the same way as the emperors treated their subjects.
    Give them bread, and they won't complain.
    Give them circuses, and they won't notice.
    Give them security, and they won't fight.
    Human nature lets such things happen, for a while. But eventually it revolts and the further it has been pushed one way, the more aggressive and reactionary the revolt.

    If you want my website, you're going to have to prise it from my cold, dead hands.

    --
    Ceci n'est pas une signature
  22. It's part of a larger scheme by xyote · · Score: 2, Insightful
    or diabolical conspiracy if you must. I was trying to figure what was going on with all this outsourcing and stuff. If you can move companies around and staff them with commodity workers and infrastructure, what exactly is a company? What prevents anyone else with sufficient capital from doing exactly the same thing and becoming an instant competitor and displacing the first company in the marketplace? The answer is IP and increasingly, business model IP.


    It used to be a company's business model was largely embodied in its personnel. Knowledge in that form had a lot of inertia in setting up and tranferring, so it prevented anyone else from becoming instant competitors. But that way of doing business is largely incompatible with commodity workers, hence the new model.


    An added benefit from the company's point of view is that it solves the problem that figured in Neil Stephenson's Snow Crash, workers taking home the knowledge of their jobs. Now it doesn't matter what you know since it's illegal for you to use that knowledge. Of course it sucks if you are a displaced worker and that is the only knowledge that you have.

  23. Get on the bandwagon by Moderation+abuser · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I have to say that this sounds like a great way of making money.

    Generate a bunch of very broad ideas, get the patent office to grant patents on them and then contact all the big web based companies and offer to license the Intellectual Property to them, or else.

    Tell me again why everyone isn't doing it?

    --
    Government of the people, by corporate executives, for corporate profits.
  24. Lets find prior art and bury this bs by the_archivist · · Score: 2, Informative

    heres a link to the patent for yr interest. Read the patent

    --
    while(karma less_than enough_karma){karma++}
  25. New business practices... by silverhalide · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People should just quit hiring attornies and start hiring assasins instead. When someone tries to sue you for letting people login to your website, have them killed. Problem solved! Probably cheaper than a lawyer too. What does a typical assasin run these days?